
Brainy and bizarre, ‘28 Years Later' shows a zombie series running into dark, strange territory
There is, albeit sporadically and spasmodically. '28 Years Later,' the first entry of a promised trilogy, has a dull central plot beefed up by unusual ambition, quirky side characters and maniacal editing. It's a kooky spectacle, a movie that aggressively cuts from moments of philosophy to violence, from pathos to comedy. Tonally, it's an ungainly creature. From scene to scene, it lurches like the brain doesn't know what the body is doing. Garland and Boyle don't want the audience to know either, at least not yet.
The plot picks up nearly three decades into a viral 'rage' pandemic that's isolated the British Isles from the civilized world. A couple hundred people have settled into a safe-enough life on Lindisfarne, an island that's less than a mile from shore. The tide recedes every day for a few hours, long enough to walk across a narrow strip of causeway to the mainland. Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Isla (Jodie Comer) were young when normality collapsed, roughly the same age as the kids in the film's cheeky opening flashback who are watching a VHS tape of 'Teletubbies' while hearing the screams of their babysitters getting bitten. But these survivors have managed to grow up and become parents themselves. Given their harsh circumstances, Jamie and Isla have called their son Spike.
Name notwithstanding, 12-year-old Spike (Alfie Williams) is a sweet kid. When his father slips him a precious ration of bacon, he gives his share to his mother, who now lies weak and confused in an upstairs bedroom. The script pushes too hard to make Spike naive — blank and moldable — instead of what narrative logic tells us he is, the hardscrabble child of two stunted children. His career paths are hunter, forager or watchtower guard, but he seems more like the product of a progressive Montessori school, even with his dad urging him to cackle at shredded deer intestines. When the boy's not looking, Johnson's shoulders sag as he trudges up the stairs to Comer's sickbed, showing us a hint of adult complexities he alone understands.
Spike's storyline is a fairly simple coming-of-age journey. Once he's slayed his first infected ('The more you kill, the easier it gets,' his dad gloats), Spike decides to sneak his sick mother to the mainland in search of a mythological being: a general medical practitioner. But straightaway, the movie's editing (by Jon Harris) starts having a fit, seizing our attention as it splices in herky-jerky black-and-white archival footage of earlier generations of kids marching to protect their homes, both in newsreels and classical retellings including Laurence Olivier's 1944 film of 'Henry V.' The chilling electronic score by the Scottish group Young Fathers blurps and drones while an unseen voice recites Rudyard Kipling's 'Boots,' a poem about the grinding Boer War that was first published in 1903, but whose sense of slogging exhaustion sounds just as relevant to us as it would to Beowulf. These theatrics sound fancy, but they play deliberately abrasive and confounding. '28 Days Later' forced the audience to adapt to the ugliness of digital cameras, and despite the years and prestige that Garland and Boyle have accumulated since, they've still got a punk streak.
The filmmakers seem to be making the point that our own kinder, gentler idealism is the outlier. Humankind's natural state is struggle and division. In this evocative setting, with its crumbling castle towers and tattered English flags, we're elbowed to think of battles, from Brexit to the Vikings, who first attacked the British on this very same island in 793. A 9th century account describes the Lindisfarne massacre as nightmarish scenes of blood and trampling and terror, of 'heathen men made lamentable havoc.' Those words could have been recycled into '28 Years Later's' pitch deck.
As a side note, Lindisfarne remains so small and remote that it doesn't even have any doctors today. The one we meet, Kelson (Ralph Fiennes), doesn't show up until the last act. But he's worth the wait, as is the messianic Jimmy (Jack O'Connell), who appears three minutes before the end credits and successfully gets us excited for the sequel, which has already been shot. (Jimmy's tracksuits and bleached hair are evidence that his understanding of pop culture really did stop at Eminem.) Their characters inject so much energy into the movie that Boyle and Garland seem to be rationing their best material as strictly as Spike denies himself that slice of pork.
This confounding and headstrong movie doesn't reveal everything it's after. But it's an intriguing comment on human progress. The uninfected Brits have had to rewind their society back a millennium. When a Swedish sailor named Erik (Edvin Ryding, marvelous) is forced ashore, he talks down to all the Brits like they're cavemen. They've never even seen an iPhone (although the movie was itself shot on them). Upon seeing a picture of a modern Instagram babe plumped to a Kardashian ripeness, Spike gasps, 'What's wrong with her face?'
The infected ones have regressed further still and they've split into two sub-species: the grub-like 'slow-low' zombies, who suck up worms with a vile slurp, and the Neanderthalish sprinters who hunt in packs. The fast ones even have an alpha (Chi Lewis-Parry) who is hellbent on taking big strides forward. One funny way he shows it is he's made a hobby of ripping off his prey's heads to use their spines as tools, or maybe even as décor.
Dr. Kelson, a shaman, sculptor and anthropologist, insists that even the infected still share a common humanity. 'Every skull has had a thought,' he says, stabbing a freshly decapitated one with his pitchfork. He's made an art of honoring death over these decades and his occasionally hallucinatory sequence is truly emotional, even if Fiennes, smeared with iodine and resembling a jaundiced Colonel Kurtz, made me burst out into giggles at the way he says 'placenta.' Yet, I think we're meant to laugh — he's the exact mix of smart and silly the film is chasing.
So who, then, are the savages? The infected or us? The film shifts alliances without taking sides (yet). I'm unconvinced that sweetie pie Spike is the protagonist I want to follow for two more movies. But whatever happens, it's a given that humans will eventually, stubbornly, relentlessly find a way to tear other humans to pieces, as we do in every movie, and just as we've done since the first homo sapien went after his rival with a stick. That's the zombie genre's visceral power: It reveals that the things that make us feel safe — love, loyalty, civility — are also our weaknesses. '28 Years Later' dares us to devolve.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time Magazine
a day ago
- Time Magazine
What Superman's End‑Credits Mean Amid Franchise Fatigue
Warning: This post contains spoilers for the endings of Superman, Sinners, and 28 Years Later. Let's get this out of the way. Does Superman have an end-credits scene? Yes. In fact it has two. Do they matter? They do not. One involves Superman cuddling his dog Krypto—cute but not exactly offering up anything in the way of plot development. In another he banters with Mister Terrific, a superhero who helped save the world by closing up a portal to another dimension, about the imperfect alignment of the two halves of Metropolis that got ripped apart in that cataclysmic incident. Again, funny, but offers no hint as to the future of Superman or his various friends and foes in the DC Comics film adaptations. The lack of substance in these two scenes may come as a surprise to many moviegoers. We've come to expect our summer blockbusters to conclude with a sequence buried in the credits that sets up the sequel or spinoff or next chapter in the superhero saga we just watched. The Marvel Cinematic Universe didn't invent the end-credits scene: '80s comedies like Airplane! and Ferris Bueller's Day Off wrote stingers for laughs. But the MCU jumpstarted the modern trend way back in 2008 when Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury showed up to recruit Robert Downey Jr.'s Iron Man into a new supergroup. (Spoiler alert: They're called the Avengers.) Nearly every Marvel movie since has tacked on a scene or two during the credits teasing the upcoming movies in the franchise. Other cinematic universes—the DCEU, Fast & Furious, Pirates of the Caribbean, John Wick—followed suit, training audiences to stay put in their seats, just in case. Superman is launching the brand new DCU (the DC Universe, rebranded from the old DCEU or DC Extended Universe). So one would expect Superman director and co-creative mastemind of the DCU, James Gunn, to seize the opportunity to tease one of the DC projects coming out next year like the Supergirl movie, the horror film Clayface, or even the HBO show Lanterns. But he opted for a more comedic direction instead. Some fans might welcome the Superman stingers as refreshingly light diversions. After all, audiences seem to have rebelled against the amount of homework they've been asked to do to keep up with superhero films and series these days, a frustration that has manifested in cratering box-office returns and depressed streaming numbers. Others might wonder why they sat through a long string of credits only to be rewarded with style over substance. In theory, the answer might be the immeasurable value of learning the names of the many, many stunt performers and CGI programmers who worked on this film. But let's be real, you were probably scrolling your phone during the credits, weren't you? It begs the question, what are post-credits scenes for these days, anyway? Three of this year's biggest movies—Superman, Sinners, and 28 Years Later—take three notably different approaches to their ending scenes. The evolution of the stringer suggests that directors are eager to evolve the rote end-credits scene into something more innovative or, let us hope, entertaining. Sinners puts a crucial scene in the credits On the opposite side of the post-credits scene conundrum from Gunn's Superman sits Ryan Coogler's Sinners: The horror film's mid-credits scene serves as an essential coda to the story. Before my press screening of that film, a docent was sent into the theater to instruct journalists to remain seated through the credits, despite the fact that by Coogler's own assertion, Sinners is a stand-alone work, not the first in a burgeoning vampire universe. Good thing he did, because without the heads-up, I would have missed a key moment of closure to the story. The movie, set during the Jim Crow era, flashes forward to the 1990s. First comes a bit of stunt casting: Legendary blues musician Buddy Guy plays an aged version of the main character Sammie (portrayed in the rest of the movie by Miles Caton). He has grown from aspiring singer to successful musician playing a club in Chicago. Then, a moment of surprise: Vampire versions of Miles' family members, Michael B. Jordan's Stack and Hailee Steinfeld's Mary, have survived the epic battle at the end of the film and come to chat with Sammie. Coogler elicits a chuckle from the audience with Jordan's and Steinfeld's period-accurate, completely over-the-top '90s getups. But the heart of the scene is the moment of closure for Sammie. Sammie once abandoned his priest father and religion to pursue the blues in a metaphorical deal with the devil. He found happiness in doing so, despite carrying the scars of the night when he summoned demons with his angelic voice. When Stack arrives at the night club, he tells Sammie that the old musician will die soon and offers to make him immortal. Sammie turns Stack down. Sammie has lived a full life but also seen the ills of the Earth and will be ready to depart. He admits that while the night he fought vampires and lost nearly everyone he loved still haunts him, the preceding day setting up the juke joint that Stack opened with his twin brother Smoke was the best of Sammie's life. In a movie that wrangles with the complexities of religion and the vampiric state of a predominantly white-run music business that feeds on the creativity Black artists, among other themes, Sammie's happy ending—and, seemingly those of Stack and Mary—hold real power. The film is not complete without this conversation and Sammie's decision to forge his own path rather than the one laid out for him by the metaphorical devils and angels on his shoulder. As I left the theater, I wondered aloud to a colleague why Coogler would have inserted that scene mid-way through the credits rather than simply ending the film on that moment. I worried that some audience members would walk out without seeing a crucial piece of Coogler's story, and when I saw the film again a few weeks later, at least a handful of people did. That's a loss. According to Coogler himself, "The whole script was about that moment." Coogler, like Gunn, was forged in the fires of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the former having helmed two Black Panther movies, the latter three volumes of Guardians of the Galaxy. They seem to have come away from the experience with different lessons. Marvel has recently developed a reputation for introducing character and plot points in post-credits scenes that never manifest in future films. There was the Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 spinoff super-team involving Sylvester Stallone and Michelle Yeoh that disappeared from the MCU. Charlize Theron popped up in the stinger for Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, never to be seen again. Brett Goldstein made his debut as Hercules in a Thor: Love and Thunder end-credits scene that seems to be headed nowhere. And remember when Eternals previewed three different superheroes—Mahershala Ali as Blade, Kit Harington as Black Knight, and none other than Harry Styles as Eros— never to speak of those character again? Gunn, newly minted as the head of a competing cinematic universe, might be wary of overpromising and underdelivering. Fair enough. But Coogler finds himself embracing what is, perhaps, inevitable: Movies of a certain size may always contain these scenes. And he decides to deliver poignancy and character development instead of that mild hit of serotonin we get from hearing a new superhero name dropped onscreen. 28 Years Later teases a trilogy pre-credits That's all well and good if, like Coogler, you're determined to escape franchise filmmaking and direct movies that feel holistic and complete: The writer-director has said he has no plans to film a Sinners sequel. But what to do if you're helming one movie as part of a series and don't want to fall into the teaser trap? The latest entry in the 28 Days Later zombie franchise, 28 Years Later, offers yet another answer. The new zombie film, directed by Danny Boyle, is the first in a planned trilogy. Nia DaCosta will direct a 28 Years Later sequel called The Bone Temple, and then Boyle plans to return for a third and final movie. Rather than relying on a post-credits scene to set up DaCosta's film, Boyle opted instead for a tonally jarring final act to his movie. The bleak but moving film—whose third act brings the death of the main character Spike's mother and the birth of a miraculously uninfected baby from an pregnant infected—takes a major zag as Spike sets off from his old sequestered home to find his way alone on the dangerous mainland. A character named Jimmy, who appears as a young boy at the beginning of the film, returns as a full grown man. Flanked by a tracksuit-clad group of parkour enthusiasts, Jimmy rescues Spike from a horde of zombies. The fighters call themselves the Jimmys and dress like Jimmy Savile, the British television presenter who was accused after his death of committing hundreds of instances of sexual abuse, many involving children. (In this universe, the zombie outbreak happened before Savile was outed as an alleged abuser.) Much of the film deals with icons of British culture—images of the queen, clips from Shakespeare adaptations, quotes from Rudyard Kipling—so a group of young boys' pop culture obsessions crystalizing when the infection took hold of the U.K. only for those young men to end up worshipping a monster does fit thematically in the film. Still, the allusion to a serial abuser has already stirred controversy. Whatever the actual influences behind the finale, it seems a prime candidate for a post-credits scene because of its major tonal shift, its clear agenda to set up a sequel, and its distracting reference to a disgraced television personality. And yet Boyle eschewed the convention, perhaps a sign that directors are trying, in different ways, to free themselves from the tyranny of the end-credits. Don't ring the death knell for the end-credits scene yet. It won't disappear. But it is evolving. Perhaps it's a sign that we have entered an era of post-MCU dominance. Captain America: Brave New World and Thunderbolts will probably end the year in the top 10 highest grossing films, but they were beaten out at the international box office by A Minecraft Movie, the latest Mission: Impossible, and a handful of children's films: Superhero movies are not the assured home run they used to be. As audience expectations shift in search of something more original that doesn't strictly follow the MCU playbook, we can expect more freedom and experimentation. That's always a good thing. The next time you're watching a summer blockbuster in the movie theater, you might as well stay until the very end, just in case. You may see something unexpected. If nothing else, you may catch the names of a few hardworking grips and makeup artists.


Tom's Guide
2 days ago
- Tom's Guide
Netflix's new zombie movie is the undead love child of ‘28 Years Later' and ‘The Raid' — and it's just as intense as that sounds
Streaming Netflix's new action-horror 'Ziam' has taught me something about myself: I can forgive a lot of narrative cliches when a movie offers me the chance to see a martial artist roundhouse-kick a zombie in the face. It's hard to get too hung up on predictable plotting and the overreliance on genre cliches when 'Ziam' also contains some of the most exciting zombie beatdowns I've ever seen. Playing out like a mix between "28 Years Later" and "The Raid," this new Netflix original thrives because it understands what its core audience wants to see: brutal zombie mayhem above all else. Part of me does wish that 'Ziam' could have paired its seriously well-choreographed carnage with a more compelling cast of characters and a story that serves as more than window dressing between intense action sequences, but what we got is still enjoyable. If you're a simple man like me, and can't resist the elevator pitch of 'former Muay Thai fighter beats the snot out of the walking dead,' then you'll want to get this new Netflix movie on your watchlist pronto. But if you need more details, here's the full scoop on 'Ziam.' Set in a grim future where society is on the verge of collapse due to severe food shortages and dwindling resources, Singh (Prin Suparat) is a former professional fighter, now struggling to make ends meet and provide for his girlfriend, Rin (Nychaa-Nuttanicha Dungwattanawanich), who works in an overcrowded hospital. The two dream of escaping the dystopian city, but these plans are put on hold when Rin's hospital becomes the epicenter for a zombie outbreak. Singh rushes to the scene and embarks on a dangerous mission to rescue Rin before the ultra-aggressive zombie can get to her. Along the way, he meets a young boy, Buddy (Vayla-Wanvayla Boonnithipaisit), and adds this orphaned child to the list of people he's determined to protect at all costs. With a horde of zombies in his path, Singh must use his Muay Thai skills to fend off the savage undead and escape the hospital from hell. 'Ziam's' USP is pretty simple. In most zombie movies, the core cast of survivors fend off the hordes with firearms and maybe a blunt instrument or two, but here our protagonists get seriously up close and personal with their flesh-munching enemies. It turns out that you don't need an automatic assault rifle when your fists can muster enough power to send the walking dead back to the hellscape from which they spawned. And if brawls against zombies aren't enough, the second half of the action-horror movie sees Singh crack the skulls of some (slightly) more intelligent foes, namely a squad of armed cops trying to extract a high-value executive. Netflix's marketing materials for the movie are keen to stress its use of practical effects and the fact that its nameless cast of zombies were created with intricate makeup, not CGI, and this helps ratchet up the intensity nicely. Each blood-covered, grotesque, zombie face looks pleasingly disgusting, and the visceral violence can often be enough to turn your stomach. I particularly enjoyed 'Ziam's' balls-to-the-wall third act, a good deal of the first half is dedicated to scene-setting, and introducing the main players. But once this is all out of the way, the carnage takes center stage, and it's here that 'Ziam' shines. The final showdown on a rooftop bathed in early morning sunlight is particularly memorable and brings proceedings to a fitting close (or at least, it feels satisfying until a mid-credits final stinger ruins the emotional stakes). Where 'Ziam' falters is how rigidly it sticks to the classic zombie formula. Singh takes on the young Buddy as a sort of ward, protecting him at all costs, and even suggesting that they could adopt him once this madness is over. It's not exactly groundbreaking stuff for the genre. This feeling of 'been there, seen that' is extended to the movie's overarching theme, that of the regular folks being exploited by the upper class. This is most seen in the inclusion of the smarmy executive, who is deemed worthy of being extracted, even if that means putting more lives in danger. Meanwhile, the everyday citizens are deemed expendable and little more than zombie chow. Furthermore, a scene where the military debates the scorched-earth solution of bombing the hospital to prevent the zombie virus from spreading further, regardless of the lives lost, doesn't crackle with moral complexity. Instead, it feels painfully paint-by-numbers, almost included out of obligation. Of course, I'm not sure 'Ziam' is really concerned with flipping the well-worn zombie-movie script on its head. When the focus is on brutal brawls, flesh on fire and punches flying at the speed of bullets, the movie is quite a thrill ride. Just don't come looking for more than a gorefest. If you come into 'Ziam' with the right expectation, then it's very possible to enjoy this very bloody action-horror on its own terms. At a zippy 90 minutes long, the movie doesn't overstay its welcome, and while the first act does a fair bit of narrative heavy-lifting, once the outbreak begins, the carnage kicks off, and from here, 'Ziam' is solid, but unquestionably mindless, fun. Without wanting to veer into spoilers, the ending stinger leaves things on a bum note, with a tacked-on final scene that makes little logical sense and hints towards a possible sequel (do we need one?). While this left me with a vaguely sour taste, for the most part, I enjoyed 'Ziam.' All I was really looking for was a badass martial artist kicking the living daylights out of zombies, and this new Netflix original delivers that, so I'm happy to overlook its flaws. Meanwhile, thriller fans will be pleased to hear that Netflix just added a new mystery movie about a couple trapped in their apartment by a strange brick wall. Though it's another streaming original that requires viewers to tolerate some major flaws to find the enjoyment. Alternatively, for even more options, here's a guide to everything new on Netflix in July 2025. Watch "Ziam" on Netflix now


San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco's newest movie theater is opening this week. Here's how to get tickets
San Francisco's newest movie theater — and latest to fill the space at 1000 Van Ness — is open for business this week. Tickets are now on sale for showtimes beginning Thursday, July 10, at Apple Cinemas Van Ness. The soft opening for the 14-screen venue, which Apple Cinemas Director of Operations Jessica Robitaille confirmed in an email to the Chronicle, includes ' Superman.' The latest DC film from James Gunn is projected to be the top movie in North America on its opening weekend. Also screening are holdover films ' F1: The Movie,' ' 28 Years Later,' ' How to Train Your Dragon,' ' Lilo & Stitch,' ' Materialists,' ' M3gan 2.0,' Pixar's ' Elio ' and 'Jurassic World Rebirth,' currently No. 1 at the box office. This will mark the first time the smell of popcorn will fill the 92,724-square-foot space in the 1921 Don Lee Building since it was vacated by CGV Cinemas more than two years ago. Originally built as an auto dealership, the building was converted into a cinema and retail space by AMC Theatres in 1998. The theater closed in 2019 before the South Korean-owned CGV Cinemas renovated and operated it from September 2021 to February 2023. Apple Cinemas, a small East Coast-based chain that opened its first theater in 2013, signed a lease with the building's owners, a partnership called 1000 Van Ness LP, in June. Robitaille told the Chronicle at the time that the movie theater will be state of the art, including one IMAX screen and, eventually, San Francisco's first LED screen. 'I think San Francisco opens up a lot of opportunities,' said Robitaille, who noted the building's historic architecture. 'I think it's really a fantastic space that we have to work with and we have big plans for it.' Apple Cinemas co-founder Siva Shan told the Chronicle last month that 'Every Apple Cinema is a luxury movie theater,' and that the company's plans include adding a restaurant and bar, as well as recliner seats. 'The location and the (Van Ness) neighborhood is both a residential area as well as a commercial area, and we are very confident people will (embrace) us,' Shan said. The Van Ness theater is Apple's 14th venture and first outside of the Northeastern United States. The company has also signed a lease to take over the former Century Blackhawk Plaza in Danville, which should reopen by the end of the year.